If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Last night I hit the dyno to see what the car can do with the new ported N54 cylinder head, RB turbos, 3.5bar TMAP sensor from the new BMW N20 four-cylinder motor, FBO (catless), pump 94 octane and meth, stock turbo inlet pipes. Key thing here, this is with a tune that sees ZERO timing corrections everywhere on all cylinders and timing that is set right at MBT for this level of boost and this car's given octane. I've run the car on the street with this exact setup this morning, number of pulls, it's pretty ridiculous.

553WHP/631WTQ - PUMP GAS (94 Octane) + METH

In terms of the tune, it was running more than 22.5psi in midrange, 19.7psi peak at 6k rpm, 17.5-18psi at redline. Logs of actual boost in midrange aren't available as I found out that ATP's datalogging needs to be updated to accomodate the 3.5bar scaling. I was going off my p3 gauge for midrange boost when pushed past the 22.5psi datalogging limit. I don't recommend this to anyone before ATP is updated for 3.5bar datalog scaling, it just had to be done last night and I decided to push on as I get to do what I feel is best for my car LOL and that's make some power

No leanouts or fuel issues. LTFTs goes down to zero during the pull, STFTs trend to high negative 20s with meth. The car was running close to if not 100% meth, three 1.0mm nozzles, two of them in the FMIC outlet silicone coupler and another up in the ER charge pipe past the elbow.

I'll be fine tuning things over the coming days but to be perfectly honest and blunt, last night was about turning things UP and NOT fine tuning. It was to find MBT and push boost as far as it can go while limiting wastegate duty cycle to about 73-74% everywhere especially past 6k rpm. It was also to experiment with various VANOS changes. I experimented with higher wg duty cycles before and RBs didn't like it. It also introduces too much backpressure into the system even fully catless that the car doesn't like it.

So, is there more power left here. We'll see when the intake pipes are swapped for something better flowing. @George Smooth reported +19whp at his high altitude in South Africa so possibly another 20 in there without any changes. Then there's mixing race gas or E85 into it to see if there's anything there in terms of additional power through more timing. All out its very possible this will be a 575-585whp setup once all is said and done, dare I say 600 LOL

Other runs from last night:

By the way, on Smoothing of zero the car made 555WHP Nice even number easy to remember

Gearing/tyre selection is one thing that makes dyno results meaningless in a real world scenario... Dzenno has a 2.5x final drive, this results in much MUCH greater in-gear speeds, totally changes the torque feel of the car...

with this power level/torque level, it would be much MUCH more manageable to drive around with the long gearing.

ED: i have no idea if it effects dyno results, or how they're calculated

"Gaining power with a different transmission? They didn't teach us that at Import Tuner magazine school. This will of course not be shown on a dyno because they take the RPM signal and roller speed to correct down to a 1:1 ratio to get a clean measurement."

important part, i guess.

the torque shown in this thread is not indicative of what is actually seen at the wheels... unless this dyno in particular doesn't work like that, and shows what is actually seen at the wheels in gear?... considering that 631wtq is about as high as it gets anyway, i'm guessing not.

Torque and power are referenced at peak usually which just really tells you want the power curve looks like. Obviously the torque to the wheels changes via gearing... that is what gears do. I wouldn't o with a 2.56 personally sine the ratios will be way too long for most realistic use, but that's just me.

I wouldn't o with a 2.56 personally sine the ratios will be way too long for most realistic use, but that's just me.

It serves a purpose though lower the torque while extending it over a longer MPH range. Making it easier to put down and eliminating as frequent of shifting and also holding more torque on average over a longer span.

It serves a purpose though lower the torque while extending it over a longer MPH range. Making it easier to put down and eliminating as frequent of shifting and also holding more torque on average over a longer span.

My thought is that longer gearing would be more beneficial on the strip (and smoother on the street) but less so on the track?

For the most part, yes. Depends on the track but usually you will want tighter spacing for the speeds you will be at on the roadcourse.

Originally Posted by Flinchy

you may get a broader in gear torque/speed spread, but the wheels see less.. a LOT less.

If you calculate the math out the wheels will only see less at certain speeds but more at certain speeds.

Shorter gears for example will have more torque until the 1st to 2nd shift. So once in 2nd the longer gears still in first will have more torque up until it shifts into second. This process then repeats itself but multiplication is greatest in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and then levels out pretty hard.

You do a perfect job as an example of retard as applied in my comment.

What's really retarded is bringing gearing into a discussion about dyno numbers. We're not talking about trans losses, which is why you run 1:1...or weight of the wheel/tire combo...these are dyno numbers. Just like your eleventy billion WHP.

What's really retarded is bringing gearing into a discussion about dyno numbers.

OMG, wow, you seriously just said this? Gearing is a huge part as you don't race on the dyno and secondly others were asking about how his longer gears apply. Obviously you are more concerned with irrelevant comments and and attempting to be negative.

Originally Posted by DefactoM6

We're not talking about trans losses, which is why you run 1:1...or weight of the wheel/tire combo...these are dyno numbers. Just like your eleventy billion WHP.

You're honestly just plain stupid and messing up the thread. Since you obviously aren't grasping the topic move along so other people can discuss it. Not going to tell you again.

OMG, wow, you seriously just said this? Gearing is a huge part as you don't race on the dyno and secondly others were asking about how his longer gears apply. Obviously you are more concerned with irrelevant comments and and attempting to be negative.
You're honestly just stupid and messing up the thread. Since you obviously aren't grasping the topic move along so other people can discuss it. Not going to tell you again.

Again, resorting to personal attacks without actually addressing the issue. Real mature. I'm not denying the fact that gearing plays a huge role in RACING. Dzenno, however, did not race...he spun some rollers on a DYNO. Which correct for things like gearing, since that amount of torque is obviously not what is actually seen at the wheels in ANY gear. Read what I actually said before you get all fired up.

Again, resorting to personal attacks without actually addressing the issue. Real mature. I'm not denying the fact that gearing plays a huge role in RACING. Dzenno, however, did not race...he spun some rollers on a DYNO. Which correct for things like gearing, since that amount of torque is obviously not what is actually seen at the wheels in ANY gear. Read what I actually said before you get all fired up.

No you coming in here with a negative tone designed to put down the motor you know I have was a veiled personal attack and immature. I don't have time for this and secondly this is taking the discussion off topic so I'm removing you from the thread.

You said it's retarded to bring gearing into a discussion about dyno numbers when first of all, as you just stated gearing plays a huge role, and secondly users asked about how his longer gearing plays into this.

Anyway, since I have seen your posting pattern as of late I'm not going to waste a good thread sitting here tutoring you and allowing you to crap all over it. Back on topic and you won't be posting any longer in this thread.

My thought is that longer gearing would be more beneficial on the strip (and smoother on the street) but less so on the track?

i mean, it has to be a balance, super short gears suck, and so would super long gears

but i can't really see a 2.56fd going around a track faster than a 3.x

you may get a broader in gear torque/speed spread, but the wheels see less.. a LOT less.

I thankfully found an old post of mine I have been looking for... for well forever. If you take these dyno results, then do the math with his gears and final drive, you'll get something that looks like this:

So that's how you can figure out what gearing you want for what speeds.

This should explain what you are seeing:

Originally Posted by Sticky

There is a chunk from about 88 mph to 102 mph where the 6 speed is making more torque at the axle.

This takes place after the 1/8 mile. The fastest 1/8 mile recorded is mine: 7.876 @ 91.640.

Now, that 1/8 mile is faster both in ET and trap than the fastest 1/4 mile trapping M3 which is eagletangogreen at 115.9 mph.

Now, his car is manual and it reflects the gearing difference perfectly.

My car DCT:

1/8: 7.920 @ 91.6 mph1/4: 12.19 @ 115.170

His car 6MT:

1/8: 8.133 @ 89.8 mph1/4: 12.36 @ 115.9

So, even though I am pulling harder at the 1/8 mile and get there quicker in my DCT, because the DCT has to shift to 4th gear it has less torque @ the axle for a significantly long period after the 1/8. His results reflect this as the manual is able to erase the difference in trap speed at the 1/8 and actually start to pull.

It is not enough of a difference for him to catch me by the 1/4, but hope this shows that the shorter gearing of the DCT is actually a detriment in the 1/4 but an advantage in the 1/8. It would be an advantage on the road course.